***MERGED***Can Gwen Ifill supress her bias in moderating the Veep debate?

[Angus]

Moderator Ifill Also Has Stake In Veep Debate

By MICHELLE MALKIN | Posted Tuesday, September 30, 2008 4:30 PM PT

My dictionary defines "moderator" as "the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting." On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.

But there is nothing "moderate" about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She's so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate.

She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 — a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States. The title of Ifill's book? "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama."

Nonpartisan my foot.

Random House, her publisher, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:

"In 'The Breakthrough,' veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African-American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

"Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Sen. Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the 'black enough' conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history."

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama-Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the "Age of Obama." Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the "stunning" McCain campaign and its "bold" path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day — and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation's sole vice presidential debate?

Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale too.

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign.

She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? "The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family."

A sample of Ifill's hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedy-esque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the back porch and by the piano:

"Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator's arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn't get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing."

During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis on NBC News before Michelle Obama's speech: "A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She's educated, she's beautiful, she's tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself."

During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill's coverage of Sarah Palin's speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Conn.:

"I was appalled by Gwen Ifill's commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin's speech. Her attitude was dismissive, and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin's performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill's complete disregard for journalistic objectivity."

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: "No one's ever assumed a white reporter can't cover a white candidate."

It's not the color of your skin, sweetie. It's the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the "stunning" "Breakthrough" she's rooting for comes to pass on Jan. 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307665403952437

[Beast_from_East]

If she is so biased, why hasnt the McCain campaign said a single word about her being the moderator?

This article is the first time I have heard anything negative about Gwen, most say she is one of the most respected journalist in the business.

I am not saying this article is not true, I am just curious as to why the McCain campaign agreed to her being the moderator if she is so biased?

[ZeroClub]

It's just politics.

If Palin's general incompetence reveals itself during the debate, the so-called conservatives (who love to bellow about "responsibility" and "accountability") will simply blame Palin's poor showing on Ifill (instead of holding Palin responsible and accountable).

[JBond]

I'm really getting sick and tired of the pathetic democrats. None of them are intellectually honest. The entire party and their media attack dogs will do anything for power. The do not care about this country.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/vp-debate-moderator-pens-pro-obama-book/
VP Debate Moderator Pens Pro-Obama Book

WASHINGTON: Gwen Ifill, who is moderating Thursday's vice-presidential debate, is releasing a book on Barack Obama and other young black politicians who are "forging a bold new path to political power."


FOXNews.com
Wednesday, October 01, 2008


Questions are being raised about PBS anchor Gwen Ifill's objectivity after news surfaced that she is releasing a new book promoting Barack Obama and other black politicians who have benefited from the civil rights struggle.
Ifill is moderating Thursday night's vice-presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. Her book, "The Breakthrough," is due to be released about the same time the next president takes the oath of office.
In her book, Ifill contends that the black political structure of the civil rights movement has cleared the way for post-racial politicians to ascend to new heights..
Now some are wondering whether Ifill can be fair and balanced, and whether she should be the moderator of Thursday's 9 p.m. ET debate.
FOX News political analyst Michelle Malkin argued in a post on National Review that Ifill is "so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running."
Click here to read Malkin's entire post. (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDFhMWUxZTZmMmE5MzkzYWVhMTU5NDYyNWRhNTQyM2M=)

[ConcordCowboy]

It's just politics.

If Palin's general incompetence reveals itself during the debate, the so-called conservatives (who love to bellow about "responsibility" and "accountability") will simply blame Palin's poor showing on Ifill (instead of holding Palin responsible and accountable).

It's the start of the excuse making before the debate even begins, in case things don't go well for Palin.

Gwen is going to ask questions and both VP candidates will give answers, and then there will be rebuttals.

I doubt very seriously that she would compromise he professional integrity by asking Palin "Gotcha questions."

Honestly there really shouldn't be any such thing as a gotcha question now.

The Putin flying over Russia or Healthcare reform being the main benefit of the bailout plan have been hashed and rehashed.

If she can't come up with credible answers to those by now...She doesn't deserve to be VP...Period.

It won't be very hard to tell if Gwen's being biased or not.

[burmafrd]

I notice that none of you liberals seem to think there is anything wrong with that hack being the moderator. Typical.

[burmafrd]

And why would she feel threatened about being seen as unfair or anything else?
Show me any of the other hacks that have done things like that and paid any price. Mosgt of the media would congratulate her.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Two things to consider with this.

Why would the McCain camp not demand a change and also does the board that makes the decisions of who will moderate these debates not do checks?

Clearly she is an obama supporter.

[Doomsday101]

If she is so biased, why hasnt the McCain campaign said a single word about her being the moderator?

This article is the first time I have heard anything negative about Gwen, most say she is one of the most respected journalist in the business.

I am not saying this article is not true, I am just curious as to why the McCain campaign agreed to her being the moderator if she is so biased?

If McCain waited around for a media member who was not liberal biased we would not be holding debates. Even by the media's own polls that have been done over the years the vast majority in the media are liberals. Not saying there are no conservative media members of course there are but by a large margin most in the media business are liberals.

[JBond]

It's just politics.

If Palin's general incompetence reveals itself during the debate, the so-called conservatives (who love to bellow about "responsibility" and "accountability") will simply blame Palin's poor showing on Ifill (instead of holding Palin responsible and accountable).

The fact is she is a political hack who would love nothing more than to get their messiah elected. You would be crying a river if Rush Limbaugh was moderating the presidential debates. This is no different. Try a little intellectual honesty.

[trickblue]

It's the start of the excuse making before the debate even begins, in case things don't go well for Palin.

And if she isn't fair and unbiased, you can come back with the excuse for the excuse... it works both ways...

I certainly hope she has enough integrity to be fair. It's interesting she didn't remove her ownself as a conflict of interest, but then again, we rarely see our own biases...

Journalists today have a hard time separating the real story from their own political leanings...

[Doomsday101]

And if she isn't fair and unbiased, you can come back with the excuse for the excuse... it works both ways...

I certainly hope she has enough integrity to be fair. It's interesting she didn't remove her ownself as a conflict of interest, but then again, we rarely see our own biases...

Journalists today have a hard time separating the real story from their own political leanings...

McCain was given the choice of Ifill or Oprah. :lmao:

[Bach]

I notice that none of you liberals seem to think there is anything wrong with that hack being the moderator. Typical.

I know. Maybe we can get Rush to host the next Presidential debate and see if anyone has a problem with that.

[Cajuncowboy]

WTH! Why do they even agree to debate when they have these people involved. I'm so sure this will done fairly. :rolleyes:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/vp-debate-moderator-pens-pro-obama-book/


WASHINGTON: Gwen Ifill, who is moderating Thursday's vice-presidential debate, is releasing a book on Barack Obama and other young black politicians who are "forging a bold new path to political power."

FOXNews.com


Questions are being raised about PBS anchor Gwen Ifill's objectivity after news surfaced that she is releasing a new book promoting Barack Obama and other black politicians who have benefited from the civil rights struggle.

Ifill is moderating Thursday night's vice-presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. Her book, "The Breakthrough," is due to be released about the same time the next president takes the oath of office.

In her book, Ifill contends that the black political structure of the civil rights movement has cleared the way for post-racial politicians to ascend to new heights..

Now some are wondering whether Ifill can be fair and balanced, and whether she should be the moderator of Thursday's 9 p.m. ET debate.

FOX News political analyst Michelle Malkin argued in a post on National Review that Ifill is "so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running."


EDIT: Dang, I just another thread with this. My bad. Feel free to delete.

[BrAinPaiNt]

EDIT: Dang, I just another thread with this. My bad. Feel free to delete.

Just merged them...no biggie.:cool:

[dbair1967]

Debate, Tanked
Ifill of Obama.

By Michelle Malkin

My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.

But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 — a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

The title of Ifill’s book? The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama. Nonpartisan my foot.

Random House, her publisher, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes: “In ‘The Breakthrough,’ veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power. … Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Sen. Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the ‘black enough’ conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.”

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day — and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?

Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedy-esque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the back porch and by the piano:

“Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator’s arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn’t get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing.”

During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis on NBC News before Michelle Obama’s speech: “A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself.”

During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill’s coverage of Sarah Palin’s speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.: “I was appalled by Gwen Ifill’s commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin’s speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill’s complete disregard for journalistic objectivity.”

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on Jan. 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

— Michelle Malkin is author of Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild.

© 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC

[trickblue]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130288

[Vintage]

I predict after the debate...

Republicans will claim Palin won.
Democrats will claim Biden won.
Republicans will complain over a "bias."
Democrats will complain over a "bias."



Which means, likely, the truth will exist somewhere in the middle.

[ConcordCowboy]

And if she isn't fair and unbiased, you can come back with the excuse for the excuse... it works both ways...

I certainly hope she has enough integrity to be fair. It's interesting she didn't remove her ownself as a conflict of interest, but then again, we rarely see our own biases...

Journalists today have a hard time separating the real story from their own political leanings...

The day I see the excuse machine in high gear defending Biden at every turn with all of his screw ups...like McCain has done for Palin...then we'll talk.

[vlad]

The sad thing is everyone is operating under the assumption that someone can't have a strong opinion on a subject and still do their job objectively. That's disheartening if that's how we view real journalists today.

(and I'm going to call bs again on the liberal media...its a genius idea put out by the GOP and proof as to why I say they are so smart, but its a total crock...)

And this Malkin character...what is her deal? I've only read a few things by her (usually because they are so ridiculous I stop), but she is pretty far out there. Is she really respected? Whoa.... get a real conservative to write, heck get Ron Paul to write this, he'll blast Obama but they'll be actual substance to it. Of course he'd then blast McCain just as hard.

[Doomsday101]

The day I see the excuse machine in high gear defending Biden at every turn with all of his screw ups...like McCain has done for Palin...then we'll talk.

They don't have to because the media has not focused on Biden's screw ups yet they will play over and over Palin gaffs. Open your eyes there is an extreme bias whether you believe or not.

[trickblue]

The day I see the excuse machine in high gear defending Biden at every turn with all of his screw ups...like McCain has done for Palin...then we'll talk.

It doesn't have to be... he's gaffing it up everywhere and as I said earlier and no one cares... they chuckle and say "That's just Joe"...

[BrAinPaiNt]

It doesn't have to be... he's gaffing it up everywhere and as I said earlier and no one cares... they chuckle and say "That's just Joe"...

How many times has McCain had his gaffes and it pretty much gets overlooked.

See I keep seeing people whine about biden not getting the attention that Palin gets but at the same time they seem to forget all of the gaffes by McCain because Obama was getting the attention.

So you have the two old farts who are getting a pass on most of their gaffes while the two younger candidates get all of the attention.

I mean I did not see a big uproar when McCain said the wrong name for the President of Pakistan in the debates.

[Bach]

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/09/30/PH2008093002339.jpg

She supports Obama? Shocking.

[NinePointOh]

Maybe Palin would prefer a fluffy, softball moderator who always portrays everybody in a positive light. Someone like ... Katie Couric?

At any rate, I have yet to see anyone complaining about the NBC liaison to the McCain campaign moderating the next presidential debate.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Maybe Palin would prefer a fluffy, softball moderator who always portrays everybody in a positive light. Someone like ... Katie Couric?

At any rate, I have yet to see anyone complaining about the NBC liaison to the McCain moderating the next presidential debate.

WHAT!!!!

If it is wrong for this lady to moderate this debate, I think it is wrong for the next one in the next debate.

[NinePointOh]

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/09/30/PH2008093002339.jpg

She supports Obama? Shocking.

Ooh, the race card! That didn't take long.

[MilesAustinforMVP]

I notice that none of you liberals seem to think there is anything wrong with that hack being the moderator. Typical.

Gwen Ifill is not a hack. She is one of the most respected and unbiased names in journalism. Calling Gwen Ifill a hack just shows how low conservatives are willing to sink.

I'm sure her book on Obama will be a very factual and unbiased piece of journalism, just like all of her works.

[trickblue]

How many times has McCain had his gaffes and it pretty much gets overlooked.

See I keep seeing people whine about biden not getting the attention that Palin gets but at the same time they seem to forget all of the gaffes by McCain because Obama was getting the attention.

So you have the two old farts who are getting a pass on most of their gaffes while the two younger candidates get all of the attention.

I mean I did not see a big uproar when McCain said the wrong name for the President of Pakistan in the debates.

I've seen McCain's gaffes a pretty good bit...

Now I didn't hear anything about him getting Zardari wrong... are you talking about him using Musharraf when he was in there?

[Cajuncowboy]

Gwen Ifill is not a hack. She is one of the most respected and unbiased names in journalism. Calling Gwen Ifill a hack just shows how low conservatives are willing to sink.

I'm sure her book on Obama will be a very factual and unbiased piece of journalism, just like all of her works.

:liarliar:

[Cajuncowboy]

Maybe Palin would prefer a fluffy, softball moderator who always portrays everybody in a positive light. Someone like ... Katie Couric?

At any rate, I have yet to see anyone complaining about the NBC liaison to the McCain campaign moderating the next presidential debate.

Umm, the liaison is not a McCain supporter but a member of NBC who is following the McCain Campaign. Not the same thing as writing a pro Obama book.

[Sasquatch]

Gwen Ifill is an excellent journalist. PBS, unlike other stations, has a tradition of voicing both sides of most debates. She'll do just fine. Mrs. Palin, on the other hand, that remains to be seen.

[ConcordCowboy]

They don't have to because the media has not focused on Biden's screw ups yet they will play over and over Palin gaffs. Open your eyes there is an extreme bias whether you believe or not.

It doesn't have to be... he's gaffing it up everywhere and as I said earlier and no one cares... they chuckle and say "That's just Joe"...


There's a difference between gaffes and not knowing what your talking about...which it seems to be with Palin.

I honestly think people think Palin lacks the knowledge and her things weren't gaffes at all.

And don't give me the 57 States or Roosevelt in 1929 stuff.

Dumb things to say no question...but I REALLY Honestly don't think that people think that Obama doesn't know there are 50 States not 57...it was a gaffe.

Not a case of knowledge. Again as it seems to be with Palin.

[trickblue]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q

[Cajuncowboy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q

Oh, that was fair and balanced.

[NinePointOh]

Umm, the liaison is not a McCain supporter but a member of NBC who is following the McCain Campaign.

He advocated on McCain's behalf to have Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann removed as election night anchors on MSNBC, and last week he rebutted Axelrod on air by citing pro-McCain poll numbers that turned out to be bogus.

Not the same thing as writing a pro Obama book.For all the complaints about journalistic integrity, we can at least call the book what it is. It's not a "vote for Barack" piece. It's a book about Obama, Colin Powell, Artur Davis, and Deval Patrick, and how the culture of black politics has evolved since the days of Martin Luther King. Only Fox News and Drudge have called it a "pro Obama" book.

[Sasquatch]

Oh, that was fair and balanced.

What was wrong with that? Sarah Palin did mock and belittle Obama at several turns, as did Rudy Giuliani earlier in the night. That's simply reality.

[Doomsday101]

There's a difference between gaffes and not knowing what your talking about...which it seems to be with Palin.

I honestly think people think Palin lacks the knowledge and her things weren't gaffes at all.

And don't give me the 57 States or Roosevelt in 1929 stuff.

Dumb things to say no question...but I REALLY Honestly don't think that people think that Obama doesn't know there are 50 States not 57...it was a gaffe.

Not a case of knowledge. Again as it seems to be with Palin.

Sounds more like an excuse than anything. Biden is against clean coal plants in the US and Obama is for it then changes his points after he is told hey we are for it not against it? Yeah that is knowing what you are talking about? Please the media has dogged her and has given Biden a free ride but then I would expect that a liberal could not see the forest through the trees. I will say Palin has to come off good in these debates and show that she can hold her own but I do not think she lacks the intelligence that you seem to be claiming

[Cajuncowboy]

He advocated on McCain's behalf to have Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann removed as election night anchors on MSNBC, and last week he rebutted Axelrod on air by citing pro-McCain poll numbers that turned out to be bogus.

For all the complaints about journalistic integrity, we can at least call the book what it is. It's not a "vote for Barack" piece. It's a book about Obama, Colin Powell, Artur Davis, and Deval Patrick, and how the culture of black politics has evolved since the days of Martin Luther King. Only Fox News and Drudge have called it a "pro Obama" book.

HE advocated on MSNBC's behalf because otherwise they would have had NO ratings if they had stayed.

He stated numbers that came from the Campaign. That is his job to report from the campaign.

As for the book, you know that this isn't a pro obama book how? Have you read the book yet?

[ScipioCowboy]

The fact is she is a political hack who would love nothing more than to get their messiah elected. You would be crying a river if Rush Limbaugh was moderating the presidential debates. This is no different. Try a little intellectual honesty.

Not gonna happen.:D

[Sasquatch]

The fact is she is a political hack who would love nothing more than to get their messiah elected. You would be crying a river if Rush Limbaugh was moderating the presidential debates. This is no different. Try a little intellectual honesty.

You mean the type of intellectual honesty that equates Gwen Ifill to Rush Liimbaugh? :rolleyes:

[ConcordCowboy]

Sounds more like an excuse than anything. Biden is against clean coal plants in the US and Obama is for it then changes his points after he is told hey we are for it not against it? Yeah that is knowing what you are talking about? Please the media has dogged her and has given Biden a free ride but then I would expect that a liberal could not see the forest through the trees. I will say Palin has to come off good in these debates and show that she can hold her own but I do not think she lacks the intelligence that you seem to be claiming

That's not the same as not knowing what Clean Coal Plants are or how they work.

It was stupid to not get their stories straight on what the ticket wanted...but it wasn't a lack of Knowledge on the subject.

Or did I miss something and Biden didn't know Clean Coal worked?

[NinePointOh]

HE advocated on MSNBC's behalf because otherwise they would have had NO ratings if they had stayed.

And you know this how? Guessing?

He stated numbers that came from the Campaign. That is his job to report from the campaign.You obviously have no idea what I'm referring to, so why bother defending it?

He wasn't reporting from the campaign, and that's not his job. He's the liaison (ie. it's his job to assure McCain that he can "still get a fair shake from NBC News"), not some beat reporter. He was giving what he said were the results of a recent MSNBC poll -- when in reality, the poll was taken a month ago, right after the GOP convention, as opposed to after the first debate as he had insinuated.

As for the book, you know that this isn't a pro obama book how? Have you read the book yet?I said it's not a "vote for Barack" piece, and it's not. I explained exactly what the book is about, which is readily available information to anyone willing to do any research beyond looking at the subtitle. I have no idea what kind of light it specifically paints Obama in, and neither do you, and neither does Fox News, and neither does Drudge. So why do you take their word as fact when they refer to it as "pro Obama?"

[ConcordCowboy]

What was wrong with that? Sarah Palin did mock and belittle Obama at several turns, as did Rudy Giuliani earlier in the night. That's simply reality.

Seriously what was wrong with what she said.

She's to me just pointed out what happened that night and it was the truth.

If that's the best at showing her being unfair and biased...that ain't going to do it.

[Cajuncowboy]

[QUOTE]You obviously have no idea what I'm referring to, so why bother defending it?

He wasn't reporting from the campaign, and that's not his job. He's the liaison (ie. it's his job to assure McCain that he can "still get a fair shake from NBC News"), not some beat reporter. He was giving what he said were the results of a recent MSNBC poll -- when in reality, the poll was taken weeks ago, a day or so after the GOP convention, as opposed to after the first debate as he had insinuated.


You said it was "NBC's Liason to the McCain campaign" Not McCain's rep to the media. There is a difference. In that case then you would be right.

Every campaign does their own polling. And that was what I thought you were referring to.

[NinePointOh]

You said it was "NBC's Liason to the McCain campaign" Not McCain's rep to the media. There is a difference. In that case then you would be right.

It's not McCain's rep to the media. He's NBC's rep to the McCain campaign. Not as some reporter, but as the person in charge of smoothing tensions between McCain and NBC (remember the "NBC! NBC!" chants at the GOP convention when somebody mentioned the liberal media?) and making McCain feel like he can get a "fair shake" from NBC.

[Phrozen Phil]

Does the moderator have much of an influence on the results? In the first Presidential debate, Jim Lehrer was only a factor in trying to get the candiddates to engage with each other. If she does her job well, then she's not likely to be a factor in how it goes.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Look the lady clearly seems to be an obama supporter or even if she is not it seems to be clear she is a liberal.

That video at the RNC clearly shows she is half, if not more, disgusted with not only the palin speech but the crowds (republican backers) cheers and reaction to the speech.

I think she should recluse herself from the debates or the McCain camp should just demand another person as moderator.

However at the same time we must in the future debates always make sure that neither a republican slanted or democratic slanted person gets to be moderator ever again...because we have never had it in the past until now.

Ok...I am serious about everything except the last paragraph.

I do think they have a beef with this one and if the tables were turned others would be complaining about it.

[Doomsday101]

Does the moderator have much of an influence on the results? In the first Presidential debate, Jim Lehrer was only a factor in trying to get the candiddates to engage with each other. If she does her job well, then she's not likely to be a factor in how it goes.

It does matter, it was like during the Obama and Clinton debates where she was asked some tough question directed at her while in many instance Obama would get a softball question directed at him SNL at least saw the humor in it but it can make a difference. As for Jim Lehrer I have heard from many on both sides who felt he did a great job of moderating the debate

[ScipioCowboy]

Does the moderator have much of an influence on the results? In the first Presidential debate, Jim Lehrer was only a factor in trying to get the candiddates to engage with each other. If she does her job well, then she's not likely to be a factor in how it goes.

It depends on the type of debate and the type of moderator. In my opinion, Lehrer is less a debate moderator and more a conversation starter, which is the very reason I prefer him. He allows the candidates free reign in discussing the issue at hand.

Unfortunately, as I know very little about Ifill, I can't answer your question.

However, I can almost guarantee you that, if Bill O'Reilly had been selected to moderate this debate, the rancor from the left would be deafening.:D

[Sasquatch]

Look the lady clearly seems to be an obama supporter or even if she is not it seems to be clear she is a liberal.

That video at the RNC clearly shows she is half, if not more, disgusted with not only the palin speech but the crowds (republican backers) cheers and reaction to the speech.

I think she should recluse herself from the debates or the McCain camp should just demand another person as moderator.

However at the same time we must in the future debates always make sure that neither a republican slanted or democratic slanted person gets to be moderator ever again...because we have never had it in the past until now.

Ok...I am serious about everything except the last paragraph.

I do think they have a beef with this one and if the tables were turned others would be complaining about it.

I actually watched PBS coverage of the republican convention that night, and I can tell you that her "disgust" was nothing other than fatigue and weariness. Moreover, they had a round table of presidential historians on, and Gwen's observations were most certainly in response to the comments of one of the panelists or a question from Jim Lehrer.

I have no doubt that she will be an impartial moderator. This is more faux outrage from those whose candidate is floundering hopelessly because he has nothing of substance to run on.

[Doomsday101]

Look the lady clearly seems to be an obama supporter or even if she is not it seems to be clear she is a liberal.

That video at the RNC clearly shows she is half, if not more, disgusted with not only the palin speech but the crowds (republican backers) cheers and reaction to the speech.

I think she should recluse herself from the debates or the McCain camp should just demand another person as moderator.

However at the same time we must in the future debates always make sure that neither a republican slanted or democratic slanted person gets to be moderator ever again...because we have never had it in the past until now.

Ok...I am serious about everything except the last paragraph.

I do think they have a beef with this one and if the tables were turned others would be complaining about it.


I thought Jim Lehrer did a very good job. Even though the debate was suppose to center around foreign policy and yet the debate seemed to be more 50/50 between domestic and Foreign which was understandable given what was taking place leading up to the debate but it was a situation where for the most part was a fair debate. In this case you are right this lady has no business moderating the debate

[ConcordCowboy]

Another hey LOOK over there moment.

We got a lot bigger fish to fry then worrying about Gwen.

And if McCain has a problem with it he should have said so long ago.

Why is this just coming out one day before the debate...or did I miss something and this has been talked about before?

[NinePointOh]

Ifill was the moderator for the 2004 debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. There weren't many complaints either before or after it about her moderating.

[Doomsday101]

I actually watched PBS coverage of the republican convention that night, and I can tell you that her "disgust" was nothing other than fatigue and weariness. Moreover, they had a round table of presidential historians on, and Gwen's observations were most certainly in response to the comments of one of the panelists or a question from Jim Lehrer.

I have no doubt that she will be an impartial moderator. This is more faux outrage from those whose candidate is floundering hopelessly because he has nothing of substance to run on.

So if Bill O'Reilly did the next one you would have no problem? Please, hell they may as well have Obama campaign manager moderate the debate don’t come off with this joke of it being a faux outrage this woman has a clear cut bias and a book to back it up

[ConcordCowboy]

Ifill was the moderator for the 2004 debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. There weren't many complaints either before or after it about her moderating.

They're going to say, she supports Obama and she didn't support either one of those guys.

[Doomsday101]

They're going to say, she supports Obama and she didn't support either one of those guys.

Good line, I like the truth. 1 point for you. :laugh2:

[Sasquatch]

So if Bill O'Reilly did the next one you would have no problem? Please, hell they may as well have Obama campaign manager moderate the debate don’t come off with this joke of it being a faux outrage this woman has a clear cut bias and a book to back it up

Gwen Ifill isn't O'Reilly. Sheesh.

[NinePointOh]

So if Bill O'Reilly did the next one you would have no problem? Please, hell they may as well have Obama campaign manager moderate the debate don’t come off with this joke of it being a faux outrage this woman has a clear cut bias and a book to back it up

When Gwen Ifill equates John McCain with Osama Bin Laden, then you can compare her to O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Until then, you're only damaging your own credibility.

[Doomsday101]

Gwen Ifill isn't O'Reilly. Sheesh.

No she is a liberal with a book and her admitted support of Obama behind her. Damn you can't be that blind to think Republican supporters would not be leery of that. I'm sure you think she is great but then you have a biased opinion of your own candidate. Sheesh to use your own words

[ScipioCowboy]

Gwen Ifill isn't O'Reilly. Sheesh.

You're right.

O'Reilly has yet to release a book extolling one of the candidates.:D

[BrAinPaiNt]

I thought Jim Lehrer did a very good job. Even though the debate was suppose to center around foreign policy and yet the debate seemed to be more 50/50 between domestic and Foreign which was understandable given what was taking place leading up to the debate but it was a situation where for the most part was a fair debate. In this case you are right this lady has no business moderating the debate

I think many would say that Jim leans a certain way. So the question becomes...can she come across in her duties as fair and do a good job like he did...or will she lean a certain way and do a bad job.

Either way she could recluse herself or they could ask for her removal.

We will see.

[NinePointOh]

You're right.

O'Reilly doesn't have a book out extolling one of the candidates.:D

Neither does Ifill. All Drudge and Fox News are going on is the subtitle of an unreleased book about the evolution of black politics.

[Doomsday101]

When Gwen Ifill equates John McCain with Osama Bin Laden, then you can compare her to O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Until then, you're only damaging your own credibility.

I'll compare biased anytime I would like and that is what she is. I know you like the idea of having one of your own running the debate but don't be shocked when the other side finds that a bit unfair. As for credibility what kind of credibility do you have to sit there and say well a supporter of Obama running the debate uh let’s see I don't find anything wrong with that duh. You take the cake credibility that is a joke. Then again maybe you just don’t know what the word biased means?

[Sasquatch]

No she is a liberal with a book and her admitted support of Obama behind her. Damn you can't be that blind to think Republican supporters would not be leery of that. I'm sure you think she is great but then you have a biased opinion of your own candidate. Sheesh to use your own words

She has moderated similar debates in the past with no complaints. I'm assuming that's why the republicans AGREED to have her conduct this one.

At some point, Sarah Palin needs to take responsibility for her own actions, instead of blaming her poor performance on the Charlie Gibsons and Katie Courics of the world. Even if Gwen's conduct of the debate turns out to be as biased as you seem to think it will, which I seriously doubt given her past conduct, Palin needs to stop making excuses and start performing like someone who can handle the vice presidency.

[NinePointOh]

I'll compare biased anytime I would like and that is what she is. I know you like the idea of having one of your own running the debate but don't be shocked when the other side finds that a bit unfair. As for credibility what kind of credibility do you have to sit there and say well a supporter of Obama running the debate uh let’s see I don't find anything wrong with that duh. You take the cake credibility that is a joke. Then again maybe you just don’t know what the word biased means?

If she's so awful, why do you have to grossly exaggerate it with ridiculous comparisons to O'Reilly and Limbaugh?

And why aren't you complaining about NBC's corporate liaison to the McCain campaign, whose job it is to assure McCain that "he can get a fair shake from NBC", being the moderator for the next debate? Personally, I trust the journalistic reputation of both moderators in spite of these silly quibbles. You, on the other hand, are complaining about one but not the other, which is pretty rich concerning the number of times you've said, "What if O'Reilly was moderating?"

[ScipioCowboy]

Neither does Ifill. All Drudge and Fox News are going on is the subtitle of an unreleased book about the evolution of black politics.

ex·tol
to praise highly; laud; eulogize:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extol

She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 — a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States. The title of Ifill's book? "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama."

Nonpartisan my foot.

Random House, her publisher, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:

"In 'The Breakthrough,' veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African-American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

"Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Sen. Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the 'black enough' conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history."

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama-Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the "Age of Obama." Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the "stunning" McCain campaign and its "bold" path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day — and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation's sole vice presidential debate?

Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale too.

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign.

She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? "The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family."

A sample of Ifill's hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedy-esque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the back porch and by the piano:

"Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator's arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn't get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing."

Now, explain to me how these pieces fail to extol (i.e. praise or laud) Obama.

[ConcordCowboy]

Good line, I like the truth. 1 point for you. :laugh2:

I figured it was obvious.

:p:

[jimnabby]

The whiff of desperation is getting pretty strong.

Gwen Ifill is a highly respected journalist. Nobody has complained about her being biased in the past, including when she moderated the VP debate in 2004. She got high marks all around for that performance.

The McCain campaign obviously agreed to have her moderate this debate, and has expressed no reservations about that choice. (Of course, they'd look pretty incompetent if they did start whining now).

The book is unpublished, nobody's read it, and the criticisms are based entirely on the Amazon blurb. A blurb which does not suggest praise of Obama, but rather analysis of this generation of black politicians.

She is not an "admitted Obama supporter," as people here are suggesting.

[NinePointOh]

ex·tol
to praise highly; laud; eulogize:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extol

Now, explain to me how these pieces fail to extol (i.e. praise or laud) Obama.

In that entire segment you quoted are exactly three sentences written by Ifill. They first describe the bus he rides in, then say he's hugging his wife and singing.

Please explain how that depiction extols anything other than the bus.

[Cajuncowboy]

The whiff of desperation is getting pretty strong.

Gwen Ifill is a highly respected journalist. Nobody has complained about her being biased in the past, including when she moderated the VP debate in 2004. She got high marks all around for that performance.

The McCain campaign obviously agreed to have her moderate this debate, and has expressed no reservations about that choice. (Of course, they'd look pretty incompetent if they did start whining now).

The book is unpublished, nobody's read it, and the criticisms are based entirely on the Amazon blurb. A blurb which does not suggest praise of Obama, but rather analysis of this generation of black politicians.

She is not an "admitted Obama supporter," as people here are suggesting.

Wrong!

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/oh-oh-6/

[Doomsday101]

She has moderated similar debates in the past with no complaints. I'm assuming that's why the republicans AGREED to have her conduct this one.

At some point, Sarah Palin needs to take responsibility for her own actions, instead of blaming her poor performance on the Charlie Gibsons and Katie Courics of the world. Even if Gwen's conduct of the debate turns out to be as biased as you seem to think it will, which I seriously doubt given her past conduct, Palin needs to stop making excuses and start performing like someone who can handle the vice presidency.

Regardless of who is moderating I agree Palin must come off as strong and competent, I make no excuses but I'm not going to turn a blind eye to an obvious bias. I understand you reason for blowing it off but somehow I doubt you would blow off if the person was a backer of McCain

[ConcordCowboy]

Neither does Ifill. All Drudge and Fox News are going on is the subtitle of an unreleased book about the evolution of black politics.


Are you kidding me?

The books not even about Obama?

Edit:VP Debate Moderator Pens Pro-Obama Book

WASHINGTON: Gwen Ifill, who is moderating Thursday's vice-presidential debate, is releasing a book on Barack Obama and other young black politicians who are "forging a bold new path to political power."

I saw that and thought it was a Obama book.

Then I saw that it about Obama and other young black politicians.

This is nothing.

[Doomsday101]

I figured it was obvious.

:p:

The truth normally is.

[ConcordCowboy]

The truth normally is.

Not around here.

[ScipioCowboy]

The whiff of desperation is getting pretty strong.

Gwen Ifill is a highly respected journalist. Nobody has complained about her being biased in the past, including when she moderated the VP debate in 2004. She got high marks all around for that performance.

The McCain campaign obviously agreed to have her moderate this debate, and has expressed no reservations about that choice. (Of course, they'd look pretty incompetent if they did start whining now).

The book is unpublished, nobody's read it, and the criticisms are based entirely on the Amazon blurb. A blurb which does not suggest praise of Obama, but rather analysis of this generation of black politicians.

She is not an "admitted Obama supporter," as people here are suggesting.

Just like McCain knew and approved of Ifill prior to the debate, I'm assuming that Ifill knew and approved of the Amazon blurb, which certainly seems to suggest that the book is highly laudatory of Obama.

So, yes, there is grounds for comparing to Ifill to someone like O'Reilly, who claims to be non-partisan as well.

In my opinion, McCain and Palin should go through with the debate, and mention nothing about Ifill's book. If anything, this is the McCain camp's fault for not performing rigorous fact checking.

[Cajuncowboy]

Are you kidding me?

The books not even about Obama?

Yes, it talks about Obama and gives him praise. Otherwise she wouldn't have written it.

Think, McFly.

[NinePointOh]

Wrong!

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/oh-oh-6/

That quite clearly does not say McCain didn't agree to have Ifill moderate. It says the campaign didn't know about her book. Obviously, they trusted her journalistic reputation enough to not do so much as a Google search, because the title's been on Amazon and Wikipedia for quite some time.

[NinePointOh]

Are you kidding me?

The books not even about Obama?

There's a portion about Obama. It's also about Colin Powell, Artur Davis, and Deval Patrick.

[Cajuncowboy]

That quite clearly does not say McCain didn't agree to have Ifill moderate. It says the campaign didn't know about her book. Obviously, they trusted her journalistic reputation enough to not do so much as a Google search, because the title's been on Amazon and Wikipedia for quite some time.

I agree, but the fact they didn't know makes this a bit more of a concern. Would you be up in arms if there was a moderator who wrote a book criticizing Obama?

I also agree with Scipio..This is the McCAin campaign's fault for not getting to this before.

Now if Ifill had any journalistic integrity she would excuse herself from the debate.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I agree, but the fact they didn't know makes this a bit more of a concern. Would you be up in arms if there was a moderator who wrote a book criticizing Obama?



And again I say, they can ask for her removal now if they find it to be a problem.

[jimnabby]

Wrong!

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/oh-oh-6/

So the McCain campaign agreed to have her moderate and were so comfortable with her that they didn't need to do any checking up on her. I still don't see them complaining about her.

[jimnabby]

I agree, but the fact they didn't know makes this a bit more of a concern. Would you be up in arms if there was a moderator who wrote a book criticizing Obama?

Perhaps, if it was a hit piece. But I wouldn't complain about a moderator who wrote a positive piece/book about McCain, particularly if that moderator had a long history of moderating debates and discussions (which she does every week on TV) and a sterling reputation for fairness when doing so.

[NinePointOh]

Would you be up in arms if there was a moderator who wrote a book criticizing Obama?

Ifill's book doesn't criticize McCain.

If there was a moderator with an otherwise strong journalistic reputation and previous experience as a debate moderator, who wrote a book about Vietnam veterans in politics that contained portions about John McCain among others, I wouldn't have any problem with it at all.

[Cajuncowboy]

And again I say, they can ask for her removal now if they find it to be a problem.

I wouldn't at this point. I would let it go. But as I said, if she had any journalistic integrity she would step down.

[Cajuncowboy]

So the McCain campaign agreed to have her moderate and were so comfortable with her that they didn't need to do any checking up on her. I still don't see them complaining about her.

No, you are right. And that is on them. But they didn't know about the book. It was clearly McCain's fault.

[Sasquatch]

I wouldn't at this point. I would let it go. But as I said, if she had any journalistic integrity she would step down.

:rolleyes:

Maybe the republicans should have a robot moderate the debates.

[Cajuncowboy]

:rolleyes:

Maybe the republicans should have a robot moderate the debates.

Wait, how about Kieth Ohlbermann?

How's that for you guys.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Sasquatch]

Wait, how about Kieth Ohlbermann?

How's that for you guys.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Listen, no one is objective, but both camps thought enough of her professionalism to agree to a debate with her as moderator.

Why don't we see how she does first and then revisit the issue on Friday?

[ConcordCowboy]

Yes, it talks about Obama and gives him praise. Otherwise she wouldn't have written it.

Think, McFly.

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

And she can't give him praise, in this book about young black politicians?

Doesn't mean she can't be unbiased in the VP debate...Obama won't be debating.

But continue with the mock outrage

[Cajuncowboy]

Listen, no one is objective, but both camps thought enough of her professionalism to agree to a debate with her as moderator.

Why don't we see how she does first and then revisit the issue on Friday?

At this point, I think that is fair.

[Sasquatch]

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

And she can't give him praise, in this book about young black politicians?

Doesn't mean she can't be unbiased in the VP debate...Obama won't be debating.

But continue with the mock outrage

If she didn't include Obama, they'd be questioning her jouranlistic abilities for such a glaring omission.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

This is politics pure and simple. Much ado about nothing.

[Cajuncowboy]

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

And she can't give him praise, in this book about young black politicians?

Doesn't mean she can't be unbiased in the VP debate...Obama won't be debating.

But continue with the mock outrage

Greatest height of any black man in history?

Really?

I would say he couldn't even carry MLK's shoes.

Nor could he touch greats who actually contributed to this country like George Washington Carver.

And you equate Obama with these people?

Now I KNOW you are out of it.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Greatest height of any black man in history?

Really?

I would say he couldn't even carry MLK's shoes.

Nor could he touch greats who actually contributed to this country like George Washington Carver.

And you equate Obama with these people?

Now I KNOW you are out of it.

I don't see where it is a stretch.

The First black man in the history of the USA that is a major party candidate to run for President with a chance at actually becoming president.

I don't know if there is a higher title in the USA...and some would argue world.

[Cajuncowboy]

I don't see where it is a stretch.

The First black man in the history of the USA that is a major party candidate to run for President with a chance at actually becoming president.

I don't know if there is a higher title in the USA...and some would argue world.

Oh wait, I see. This should be the first time in my life I should be proud of America. Simply because of a man's skin color. I prefer to wait until he actually does something for the country to heap great praise on him. Sorry, I'm funny that way.

[ConcordCowboy]

Greatest height of any black man in history?

Really?

I would say he couldn't even carry MLK's shoes.

Nor could he touch greats who actually contributed to this country like George Washington Carver.

And you equate Obama with these people?

Now I KNOW you are out of it.

Has there even been a Black President of the United States.

NO.

What's considered the top spot in our POLITICAL System.

The President.

The book is about Young Black POLITICIANS.

Good god...sometimes I think you argue just to see your words in print, no matter how silly they look.

But to my discredit...I'm putting the cart before the horse and assuming he's going to win by saying President.

Obviously that's my hope.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Oh wait, I see. This should be the first time in my life I should be proud of America. Simply because of a man's skin color. I prefer to wait until he actually does something for the country to heap great praise on him. Sorry, I'm funny that way.

I personally don't care if you are proud of America or not...that is your problem.

However he has did something that no other black man has done. He has been nominated by a major party to be their candidate for the POTUS. Now can you find another black man that has held that honor?

And again you said...Greatest height of any black man in history?

Then went on to talk about other black men you thought were better.

So if skin color means nothing in the conversation...why bring it up and talk about other black men.

:laugh2:

[ConcordCowboy]

If she didn't include Obama, they'd be questioning her jouranlistic abilities for such a glaring omission.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

This is politics pure and simple. Much ado about nothing.

Listen...I'm going to write a book about Young Black Politicians but you know what...I'm not going to include Obama.

You know why?

Because one day I might moderate a VP debate that Obama won't even be in and I don't want people to think I'm going to go after Palin because of it.

Brilliant!

[Cajuncowboy]

I personally don't care if you are proud of America or not...that is your problem.

However he has did something that no other black man has done. He has been nominated by a major party to be their candidate for the POTUS. Now can you find another black man that has held that honor?

And again you said...Greatest height of any black man in history?

Then went on to talk about other black men you thought were better.

So if skin color means nothing in the conversation...why bring it up and talk about other black men.

:laugh2:

Again, reading is the issue here. Concord brought up the phrase Greatest height of any Black Man, Not me.

So you need to be directing this at him if it's about skin color for you. :rolleyes:

[BrAinPaiNt]

Again, reading is the issue here. Concord brought up the phrase Greatest height of any Black Man, Not me.

So you need to be directing this at him if it's about skin color for you. :rolleyes:

And we argued that it is a legit argument that he has indeed reached the greatest heights of any black man and then you go back and bring up the skin color situation.

I really think the bezoar is making you a little off today.

[Cajuncowboy]

Has there even been a Black President of the United States.

NO.

What's considered the top spot in our POLITICAL System.

The President.

The book is about Young Black POLITICIANS.

Good god...sometimes I think you argue just to see your words in print, no matter how silly they look.

It IS a great achievement. But that hardly qualifies him as the greatest Black Man in history. Nor does it qualify as the greatest achievement by a black man in history.

And further, the issue isn't about the book per se but about moderator.

I think you just spout off just to spout off.

[Cajuncowboy]

And we argued that it is a legit argument that he has indeed reached the greatest heights of any black man and then you go back and bring up the skin color situation.

I really think the bezoar is making you a little off today.

Hello????? Concord brought up the skin color, not me.

Did they close your school before they got to the reading lessons?

[ScipioCowboy]

In that entire segment you quoted are exactly three sentences written by Ifill. They first describe the bus he rides in, then say he's hugging his wife and singing.

Please explain how that depiction extols anything other than the bus.

You should have read more than just those three sentences. One of the purposes of the book is exploring how Obama, as a young African American politician, has opened up new political avenues. Clearly, the tone of the book in this regard is laudatory .

Obviously, many of Obama's accomplishments as an African American politician are worthy of praise and adulation; however, there remains a possible conflict of interest with Ifill's involvement in this debate.

Therefore, I stand by my earlier assertion regarding O'Reilly.

[Cajuncowboy]

Listen...I'm going to write a book about Young Black Politicians but you know what...I'm not going to include Obama.

You know why?

Because one day I might moderate a VP debate that Obama won't even be in and I don't want people to think I'm going to go after Palin because of it.

Brilliant!

No problem with her writing the book. None at all. I have a problem with McCain's campaign not doing their job.

[NinePointOh]

Ifill's Book is no Secret

Updated 12:55 p.m.
By Howard Kurtz
It's no secret that Gwen Ifill has been working on a book about the younger generation of black politicians. The PBS correspondent talked about "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama" in a Washington Post article on Sept. 4.

But today, the day before Ifill is to moderate the vice-presidential debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, a conservative Web site made an issue of the book, which quickly ricocheted onto the Drudge Report. "VP Debate Moderator Ifill Releasing Pro-Obama Book," said the headline on World Net Daily picked up by Drudge.

There is no evidence that the book will be favorable to the Democratic nominee. Ifill, the host of "Washington Week," told The Post she is focusing on Obama and three other up-and-coming politicians, such as Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and Newark Mayor Cory Booker. She said she started the book when it looked unlikely that Obama would win the Democratic nomination.

"The book has been out there and discussed for months," said PBS spokeswoman Anne Bell. "It's a non-issue."
On the World Net site, the "Deal of the Day" is a $4.95 offer for what is described as the "Obama blockbuster: 'Anatomy of Deceit.'" The Web site says the book "reveals" that "his brand of change is a hostile attack on the Judeo-Christian values and freedoms most Americans hold dear."

In The Post interview, Ifill said that as the daughter of a minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations, she recognized the historic nature of Obama's candidacy. But, Ifill said, "I still don't know if he'll be a good president. I'm still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense." She added: "No one's ever assumed a white reporter can't cover a white candidate."

Ifill, who has worked for NBC News, the New York Times and The Washington Post, was widely viewed as doing a fair job as moderator of the 2004 debate between Vice President Cheney and John Edwards. She drew a bit of criticism for asking a question about Cheney's former company, Halliburton, and when the vice president said he would need more than 30 seconds to respond, she said: "Well, that's all you've got." Ifill said she was not trying to be snippy toward Cheney.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/01/ifills_book_is_no_secret.html

[BrAinPaiNt]

It IS a great achievement. But that hardly qualifies him as the greatest Black Man in history. Nor does it qualify as the greatest achievement by a black man in history.

And further, the issue isn't about the book per se but about moderator.

I think you just spout off just to spout off.

Not sure where he said it qualifies him as the greatest black man in history. Not sure it qualifies him as the greatest achievement for a black man.

However I think it is a legit argument that he has reached the heighest height of a black man. I mean after all he is an election away from possibly becoming the first black POTUS and he has already holds the title of the first black Presidential Candidate of a major party.

Nothing to sneeze at IMO.

[ScipioCowboy]

Listen, no one is objective, but both camps thought enough of her professionalism to agree to a debate with her as moderator.

Why don't we see how she does first and then revisit the issue on Friday?

For once, we're in total agreement. Palin must prove she can handle potentially biased reporters; otherwise, she'll never survive as a high-ranking Republican or a world leader.

[ScipioCowboy]

When Gwen Ifill equates John McCain with Osama Bin Laden, then you can compare her to O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Until then, you're only damaging your own credibility.

I missed this comparison entirely. Would you mind posting it?

[Cajuncowboy]

Not sure where he said it qualifies him as the greatest black man in history. Not sure it qualifies him as the greatest achievement for a black man.

However I think it is a legit argument that he has reached the heighest height of a black man. I mean after all he is an election away from possibly becoming the first black POTUS and he has already holds the title of the first black Presidential Candidate of a major party.

Nothing to sneeze at IMO.

Post #90

Enjoy!

[BrAinPaiNt]

Post #90

Enjoy!

Again show me the exact words in that post that says he is the greatest black man in history.

It says the greatest ...no here is the DIRECT quote for the post#90

.he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history

That does NOT say he is the greatest black man in history. It does not say he has had the biggest achievement of any black man in history.

It says exactly what I said it said...he has reached the greatest height of any black man in history and I happen to think that is a legitimate argument.


...Enjoy

[Cajuncowboy]

Again show me the exact words in that post that says he is the greatest black man in history.

It says the greatest ...no here is the DIRECT quote for the post#90

.he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history

That does NOT say he is the greatest black man in history. It does not say he has had the biggest achievement of any black man in history.

It says exactly what I said it said...he has reached the greatest height of any black man in history and I happen to think that is a legitimate argument.


...Enjoy


And I disagreed. And that is simply semantics and you know it. But if you want to play the game so you and your new girlfriend can have a mutual fun club, go ahead.

[ConcordCowboy]

It IS a great achievement. But that hardly qualifies him as the greatest Black Man in history. Nor does it qualify as the greatest achievement by a black man in history.

And further, the issue isn't about the book per se but about moderator.

I think you just spout off just to spout off.

Are you frickin kidding me?

I know you're not stupid but come on.

I didn't say greatest black man in history.

I said he has risen to the greatest height in BLACK POLITICAL HISTORY!

That is NOT even up for debate.

The Book is about BLACK POLITICAL HISTORY.

I mean come on.

[ConcordCowboy]

Hello????? Concord brought up the skin color, not me.

Did they close your school before they got to the reading lessons?

:laugh2:

The Books about BLACK Political History.

How the Frick are you supposed to talk about it without mentioning the word Black.

Frickin stupid.

[ConcordCowboy]

No problem with her writing the book. None at all. I have a problem with McCain's campaign not doing their job.

Then take it up with them.

[BrAinPaiNt]

And I disagreed. And that is simply semantics and you know it. But if you want to play the game so you and your new girlfriend can have a mutual fun club, go ahead.

I see jealousy rearing it's ugly head.

Now we get to the real reason behind the hostility.

[Cajuncowboy]

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

And she can't give him praise, in this book about young black politicians?

Doesn't mean she can't be unbiased in the VP debate...Obama won't be debating.

But continue with the mock outrage

You said any black man in history. Not political history, but history.

[Cajuncowboy]

:laugh2:

The Books about BLACK Political History.

How the Frick are you supposed to talk about it without mentioning the word Black.

Frickin stupid.

Read my last post. And Brain said I brought it up and I pointed out that you did. I didn't say you were wrong for bringing up his race.

If anything either you are Brain is "Fricken Stupid".

[Cajuncowboy]

I see jealousy rearing it's ugly head.

Now we get to the real reason behind the hostility.

You just keep ignoring the fact that He was the one who mentioned it, I simply responded with black men who I thought were greater than Obama. As a matter of fact, regardless of race, I think they were greater than most men for their accomplishments.

Seems like ya'll are hung up on race more than anyone.

Sheesh!

[BrAinPaiNt]

You just keep ignoring the fact that He was the one who mentioned it, I simply responded with black men who I thought were greater than Obama. As a matter of fact, regardless of race, I think they were greater than most men for their accomplishments.

Seems like ya'll are hung up on race more than anyone.

Sheesh!

But again have the reached the height of Obama? That is the point we, and it would appear the author, is talking about.

By Heights we men the first black man to be the possible next president of the USA.

That is the part I think the bezoar is screwing up for you.

The whole part of race is a major part of it because the book itself is about the heights of black men, and it would appear in the political arena.

[Cajuncowboy]

But again have the reached the height of Obama? That is the point we, and it would appear the author, is talking about.

By Heights we men the first black man to be the possible next president of the USA.

That is the part I think the bezoar is screwing up for you.

The whole part of race is a major part of it because the book itself is about the heights of black men, and it would appear in the political arena.

We can debate that issue.

But you kept saying I brought race into this. I didn't. Concord and he admitted it. Nothing wrong with it as it is a book about Blacks.

But you accused me of doing it. And, again, you were wrong.

[BrAinPaiNt]

We can debate that issue.

But you kept saying I brought race into this. I didn't. Concord and he admitted it. Nothing wrong with it as it is a book about Blacks.

But you accused me of doing it. And, again, you were wrong.

So he originally brought it because of the book. Then you kept up with it talking about the black candidate and other black people of history, then you say it is not about race, only to come back and say it is about race.

yeah...I think you gave me the bezoar.

[Cajuncowboy]

So he originally brought it because of the book. Then you kept up with it talking about the black candidate and other black people of history, then you say it is not about race, only to come back and say it is about race.

yeah...I think you gave me the bezoar.

You're kidding right?

Even in that verbal map you just posted, no way can you find the route to a valid point.

He said one thing and I disagreed.

H countered with men that I thought was greater. Heck, I think those men were greater than McCain or even Bush.

It really isn't about race. They contributed something to society. Obama has not. So to put him on the same plane as them is ridiculous. It also could be argued that if you are only talking from a political perspective, Obama has done more to drive a wedge between people with his agenda than anyone. MLK brought people together. It wasn't popular at the time but his legacy is strong. At this point you can't say the same for Obama.

[ConcordCowboy]

You said any black man in history. Not political history, but history.

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

I was talking about a book about Young Black Politicians that included Obama and I said he had risen to the Greatest Height of any black man in history.

I thought people could figure out that I was talking about politics not in all of history...when I said that.

You seem to be the only one who couldn't.

I guess I needed to add Greatest Height in Black Politics to make it crystal clear for you.

But I figured it wasn't necessary.

Sorry I gave you too much credit.

[BrAinPaiNt]

You're kidding right?

Even in that verbal map you just posted, no way can you find the route to a valid point.

He said one thing and I disagreed.

H countered with men that I thought was greater. Heck, I think those men were greater than McCain or even Bush.

It really isn't about race. They contributed something to society. Obama has not. So to put him on the same plane as them is ridiculous. It also could be argued that if you are only talking from a political perspective, Obama has done more to drive a wedge between people with his agenda than anyone. MLK brought people together. It wasn't popular at the time but his legacy is strong. At this point you can't say the same for Obama.

But again the author, the very person we were talking about being a biased moderator because she is writing about obama...was making a book about....BLACK MEN.

So it is about race because I don't think she is writing a book about Black men and is going to put McCain in it as a principle person or topic.

Now you can also boil it down that you don't like obama, not because he is black, because he is a liberal democrat and then after that you used every excuse not to admit to why the lady is writing the book or that he has reached a position that no other black man (again because that is what the book is about) has reached in history.

Geez...if you still don't get it, forget it I am tired of you running around in circles with this weak argument that boils down to you not liking Obama.

[Cajuncowboy]

She wouldn't have written a book about young black politicians if she couldn't put something in there about Obama?

Frickin DUH...he has risen to the greatest height that any black man has in history...what did you think she was going to do leave him out?

I was talking about a book about Young Black Politicians that included Obama and I said he had risen to the Greatest Height of any black man in history.

I thought people could figure out that I was talking about politics not in all of history...when I said that.

You seem to be the only one who couldn't.

I guess I needed to add Greatest Height in Black Politics to make it crystal clear for you.

But I figured it wasn't necessary.

Sorry I gave you too much credit.

No, you just wanted to make him look more important than he is and on top of that, I would argue the fact that getting an nomination to the presidency in this day and age, is not the same as what MLK did politically or as significant as what MLK did.

[WoodysGirl]

So the McCain campaign agreed to have her moderate and were so comfortable with her that they didn't need to do any checking up on her. I still don't see them complaining about her.
Fox's Greta Van Susteren reports that the McCain campaign didn't know about it.

"I am stunned….the campaign (actually both) should have been told before the campaign agreed to have her moderate. It simply is not fair -- in law, this would create a mistrial."

<snip>

Regardless, the story's getting major play on cable news, especially Fox.

This morning with Bill Hemmer, Fox analyst Juan Williams spoke admirably of Ifill as a journalist but admitted that "it looks like she has some investment" in the outcome of the election, and that "there's a perception problem."

<snip>

UPDATE: A spokesperson for PBS's NewsHour said that Ifill is en route to the debate in St. Louis. When asked whether Ifill might disclose that she's writing this book during the debate, the spokesperson said he had no knowledge that she would, and declined to comment further. I also have a call into the Commission on Presidential Debates, and will update if they have a comment.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081001/pl_politico/22742

[Cajuncowboy]

But again the author, the very person we were talking about being a biased moderator because she is writing about obama...was making a book about....BLACK MEN.

So it is about race because I don't think she is writing a book about Black men and is going to put McCain in it as a principle person or topic.

Now you can also boil it down that you don't like obama, not because he is black, because he is a liberal democrat and then after that you used every excuse not to admit to why the lady is writing the book or that he has reached a position that no other black man (again because that is what the book is about) has reached in history.

Geez...if you still don't get it, forget it I am tired of you running around in circles with this weak argument that boils down to you not liking Obama.

So why did you accuse ME of bringing race into it? I didn't. The only circle you are running in is the one trying to figure a way out of your own mess.

Heck I don't like Obama but it certainly isn't due to his race. Which is what you are trying to infer.

[Cajuncowboy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081001/pl_politico/22742

Secret or not, the fact is that THEY didn't know about it. They failed to do their due diligence. That's their fault. But it doesn't change the fact they made the decision without all the facts. I'm sure if they had known they wouldn't have agreed.

[BrAinPaiNt]

So why did you accuse ME of bringing race into it? I didn't. The only circle you are running in is the one trying to figure a way out of your own mess.

Heck I don't like Obama but it certainly isn't due to his race. Which is what you are trying to infer.

Because you have been flip flopping back in your many attempts of refusing to give Obama credit because you don't like him.

I mean honestly it is kind of humorous.

Furthermore I was not trying to infer you were a racist by any stretch, although I am starting to think that is how you took it. I have said time and time again if I think someone is racist I will say it in no uncertain terms so nobody can confuse it.

Race is indeed involved in why the book was being written, why Obama is a principle person in the book and why the author is of the same race. But then to turn around and act like race has nothing to do with it is just silly to me. You were so all over the map on it in every attempt to somehow make sure you gave nothing good in concerns to Obama.

[Cajuncowboy]

Because you have been flip flopping back in your many attempts of refusing to give Obama credit because you don't like him.

I mean honestly it is kind of humorous.

Furthermore I was not trying to infer you were a racist by any stretch, although I am starting to think that is how you took it. I have said time and time again if I think someone is racist I will say it in no uncertain terms so nobody can confuse it.

Race is indeed involved in why the book was being written, why Obama is a principle person in the book and why the author is of the same race. But then to turn around and act like race has nothing to do with it is just silly to me. You were so all over the map on it in every attempt to somehow make sure you gave nothing good in concerns to Obama.

I wasn't all over the place. I made one opinion and stated it plainly. What do you want me to give him credit for? What has he done for this country?

Name one thing.

And getting nominated isn't something he did for the country. It's something he did for himself.

MLK did something for this country.

Carver did something for this country.

You are the one all over the place backtracking about who said what.

[ConcordCowboy]

No, you just wanted to make him look more important than he is and on top of that, I would argue the fact that getting an nomination to the presidency in this day and age, is not the same as what MLK did politically or as significant as what MLK did.

And yet you're the only person that saw it that way.

It doesn't matter about the Presidency vs MLK.

I was talking about Politics ONLY...I have made that crystal clear and Obama has Risen to the Greatest Height in History for a Black man there.

Period...there is NO debate about that.

You know Brain's right.

All this you said Greatest in all of History...you didn't mean politics and the Presidency vs MLK BS...is just that BS.

It just boils down like Brain said to you wanting to argue...because you hate Obama.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I wasn't all over the place. I made one opinion and stated it plainly. What do you want me to give him credit for? What has he done for this country?

Name one thing.

And getting nominated isn't something he did for the country. It's something he did for himself.

MLK did something for this country.

Carver did something for this country.

You are the one all over the place backtracking about who said what.

Lordy.

I have to leave work in a few minutes.

However as I have stated TIME AFTER TIME ...he has reached height that no other black man in the history of the world has reached. He is candidate for the POTUS of a major party and has a legit chance of being the first black POTUS...and since the book is about black men, it seems pretty obvious here.

But again you are blinded by the whole thing because he is a liberal democrat.

Ok...enough of that, too much silliness for me today...have to head out.

[Cajuncowboy]

And yet you're the only person that saw it that way.

It doesn't matter about the Presidency vs MLK.

I was talking about Politics ONLY and Obama has Risen to the Greatest Height in History for a Black man there.

Period...there is NO debate about that.

You know Brain's right.

All this you said Greatest in all of History...you didn't mean politics and the Presidency vs MLK BS...is just that BS.

It just boils down like Brain said to you wanting to argue...because you hate Obama.

I don't hate Obama. I don't know him personally so how can I hate him? I hate his political agenda. But not the man, He is a Christian and so as a Christian I love the guy. But I don't want him in office.

Now if you want to say that Obama has gone further in the political system than any other Black man, I will give you that. Though I guess that could be argued that Colin Powell's position of Secretary of state might trump that of being a parties nominee.

Further, I think the fact that Condi Rice's advancements are much more impressive than Obama's as she has actually served the country longer and with more distinction than Obama.

Say what you want but I have been very consistent with this.

[ConcordCowboy]

I don't hate Obama. I don't know him personally so how can I hate him? I hate his political agenda. But not the man, He is a Christian and so as a Christian I love the guy. But I don't want him in office.

Now if you want to say that Obama has gone further in the political system than any other Black man, I will give you that. Though I guess that could be argued that Colin Powell's position of Secretary of state might trump that of being a parties nominee.

Further, I think the fact that Condi Rice's advancements are much more impressive than Obama's as she has actually served the country longer and with more distinction than Obama.

Say what you want but I have been very consistent with this.

That's ALL I've ever said.

I can't see Secretary of State trumping Presidential nominee.

But to each their own.

[Cajuncowboy]

That's ALL I've ever said.

I can't see Secretary of State trumping Presidential nominee.

But to each their own.

This is where we part ways on terminology. When I think political I think of all the influences. Everyone from those who marched for civil rights and equality to those elected to those who use their voice, be it conservative or liberal. And when you say political that's what I see.

When you say political system, then we have better understanding of ewach other.

I would say that a presidential nominee though doesn't have the power that a secretory of State does so that is why I would question the equating of the two. That was my main point regarding that.

Now if he wins (don't count on it Buckeye) then I would agree wholeheartedly with you. But it's premature to give him that status.

[ConcordCowboy]

This is where we part ways on terminology. When I think political I think of all the influences. Everyone from those who marched for civil rights and equality to those elected to those who use their voice, be it conservative or liberal. And when you say political that's what I see.

When you say political system, then we have better understanding of ewach other.

I would say that a presidential nominee though doesn't have the power that a secretory of State does so that is why I would question the equating of the two. That was my main point regarding that.

Now if he wins (don't count on it Buckeye) then I would agree wholeheartedly with you. But it's premature to give him that status.


Oh the Scarlet OUT is coming!

:p:

O-H-I-O!

[Cajuncowboy]

Oh the Scarlet OUT is coming!

:p:

O-H-I-O!

I'm sure it will. That'll be the color of embarrassed faces in the crowd.

[ConcordCowboy]

I'm sure it will. That'll be the color of embarrassed faces in the crowd.

Penn St fans?

:p:

[Cajuncowboy]

Penn St fans?

:p:

Well since it's at OHIO I don't think sooooooo.

[zrinkill]

If Obama loses this election and never runs again he will be forgotten in 10 years.

Great Black heroes like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman, Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, Daniel James Jr, Nelson Mandela and Colin Powell will be (or should be) remembered always.

I consider that "rising to greater heights" than anything else.

[Doomsday101]

If Obama loses this election and never runs again he will be forgotten in 10 years.

Great Black heroes like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman, Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, Daniel James Jr, Nelson Mandela and Colin Powell will be (or should be) remembered always.

I consider that "rising to greater heights" than anything else.

Thurgood Marshall is a man who should be on that list.

[zrinkill]

Thurgood Marshall is a man who should be on that list.

Yes, and many more I left out .....

Just named a few off the top of my head .... including 2 heroes of mine.

[ConcordCowboy]

Well since it's at OHIO I don't think sooooooo.

Oh I'm sure there'll be some Penn St fans there...but not many.

:D

[ConcordCowboy]

If Obama loses this election and never runs again he will be forgotten in 10 years.

Great Black heroes like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman, Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, Daniel James Jr, Nelson Mandela and Colin Powell will be (or should be) remembered always.

I consider that "rising to greater heights" than anything else.

If I wasn't ONLY talking about U.S. Presidential Politics...I'd agree with you.

[Cajuncowboy]

If Obama loses this election and never runs again he will be forgotten in 10 years.

Great Black heroes like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman, Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, Daniel James Jr, Nelson Mandela and Colin Powell will be (or should be) remembered always.

I consider that "rising to greater heights" than anything else.

Not sure if he will be forgotten but placing him on the same level at this point with others is premature.

[Beast_from_East]

If McCain waited around for a media member who was not liberal biased we would not be holding debates. Even by the media's own polls that have been done over the years the vast majority in the media are liberals. Not saying there are no conservative media members of course there are but by a large margin most in the media business are liberals.

Just because you may be liberal does not mean you cannot be imparital.

Tim Russert worked for NBC (most on here call it the Obama network), but he was one of the most repected and impartial moderators of all time.

Jim Lehr of PBS did a great job in the first debate, he is also considered one of the best in the business and imparitial.

Tom Brokoaw (sp?) replaced Russert on Meet The Press on NBC (again, Obama network to most on here), and he is considered one of the all-time greats.

So to say that everybody in the media is in the tank for Obama and that we would not have a single debate if we looked for an unbiased moderator is just not true.

[ConcordCowboy]

Not sure if he will be forgotten but placing him on the same level at this point with others is premature.

If he wins Cajun and does a good job...man it's going to kill you to put him on that list.

:D

[Cajuncowboy]

If he wins Cajun and does a good job...man it's going to kill you to put him on that list.

:D

If elected I will support him. And hope he does do a good job. He would be my president.

Your assume things.

[Bach]

Ooh, the race card! That didn't take long.

It's not a card, it's a fact:

Obama has a decisive lead among black voters (88-5)

Conversely, McCain edges Obama 50-42 among white voters.


http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2008/09/fl-poll-obama-4.html


In this poll McCain has an 8% lead among whites, but Obama has an 83% lead among blacks. Now tell me, who is making race an issue here?

[Doomsday101]

Just because you may be liberal does not mean you cannot be imparital.

Tim Russert worked for NBC (most on here call it the Obama network), but he was one of the most repected and impartial moderators of all time.

Jim Lehr of PBS did a great job in the first debate, he is also considered one of the best in the business and imparitial.

Tom Brokoaw (sp?) replaced Russert on Meet The Press on NBC (again, Obama network to most on here), and he is considered one of the all-time greats.

So to say that everybody in the media is in the tank for Obama and that we would not have a single debate if we looked for an unbiased moderator is just not true.

Tim Russert was very good and respected. Working for NBC does not make one bias but your views do and when your personal views start showing in your reports then that is a problem. As I said in this thread no not all in the media are liberal but even accoding to media polls they have conducted they acknowldge that most members of the media tend to be liberals. It is not something I'm making up and they have many polls over the years that have shown the same things.

[Viper]

Or did I miss something and Biden didn't know Clean Coal worked?

If Biden knew it worked, why was he against it?

[ConcordCowboy]

If Biden knew it worked, why was he against it?

I don't know, you'll have to ask him.

Maybe it was the cost.

I've read that while it's good to have Clean Coal...it's expensive.

Don't know just guessing.

Again...did I miss something that you know?

Has someone come out and said that Biden doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to how it worked?

Because saying you're against it and then being told hey Obama's for it isn't the same as not knowing how it works.

[trickblue]

I don't know, you'll have to ask him.

Maybe it was the cost.

I've read that while it's good to have Clean Coal...it's expensive.

Don't know just guessing.

Again...did I miss something that you know?

Has someone come out and said that Biden doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to how it worked?

Because saying you're against it and then being told hey Obama's for it isn't the same as not knowing how it works.The Clintons' Coal-Gate
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT

As Bush wrapped up his Middle East trip, Sen. Clinton commented: "President Bush is over in the Gulf now begging the Saudis and others to drop the price of oil. How pathetic."

A large part of America's energy dependence on foreign sources can be traced to Sept. 18, 1996, when President Bill Clinton stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon on the Arizona side and signed an executive proclamation making 1.7 million acres of Utah a new national monument.

While sitting on the Arizona side of the Grand Canyon, Bill Clinton signed an order that federalized 1.7 million acres of Utah.

Why would he dedicate a Utah monument while standing in Arizona? Well, this federal land grab was done without any consultation with the governor of Utah or any member of the Utah congressional delegation or any elected official in the state. The unfriendly Utah natives might have spoiled his photo-op.

The state already had six national monuments, two national recreation areas and all or part of five national forests. Three-quarters of Utah already was in federal hands. Still, the land grab was sold as a move to protect the environment.

At the time, the Clintons were worried that Ralph Nader's presence on the ballot in a few Western states would draw green votes from Clinton in a race that promised to be close after the GOP retook Congress two years earlier.

In fact, the declaration of 1.7 million Utah acres as a national monument, thereby depriving an energy-starved U.S. up to 62 billion tons of environmentally safe low-sulfur coal worth $1.2 trillion and minable with minimal surface impact, was a political payoff to the family of James Riady.

He's the son of Lippo Group owner Mochtar Riady. James was found guilty of — and paid a multimillion dollar fine for — funneling more than $1 million in illegal political contributions through Lippo Bank into various American political campaigns, including Bill Clinton's presidential run in 1992.

Clinton took off the world market the largest known deposit of clean-burning coal. And who owned and controlled the second-largest deposit in the world of this clean coal? The Indonesian Lippo Group of James Riady. It is found and strip-mined on the Indonesian island of Kalimantan.

The Utah reserve contains a kind of low-sulfur, low-ash and therefore low-polluting coal that can be found in only a couple of places in the world. It burns so cleanly that it meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act without additional technology.

"The mother of all land grabs," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said at the time. He has called what was designated as the Grande Staircase of the Escalante National Monument the "Saudi Arabia of coal."

When Clinton signed the proclamation, he promised to exchange other federal lands for the land that was taken. But a fair exchange was impossible, Hatch said, since no other land in Utah had a trillion dollars worth of clean coal.

Rep. James Hansen, R-Utah, pointed out that a large portion of the coal-rich Kaiparowits Plateau within the monument belonged to the children of Utah. When Utah became a state in 1896, about 220,000 acres were set aside for development, and a trust fund was created to collect and hold all the revenues directly for the benefit of schools.

Margaret Bird, trust officer for the fund, said that because the land will not be developed, the schools stand to lose as much as $1 billion over the next 50 years. Phyllis Sorensen, head of the Utah chapter of the National Education Association, called Clinton's action a "felonious assault" and "stealing from the schoolchildren."

Stealing from children to reward Indonesian billionaires. How pathetic.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...285982232964929 (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=285982232964929)

[Viper]

I don't know, you'll have to ask him.

Maybe it was the cost.

I've read that while it's good to have Clean Coal...it's expensive.

Don't know just guessing.

Again...did I miss something that you know?

Has someone come out and said that Biden doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to how it worked?

Because saying you're against it and then being told hey Obama's for it isn't the same as not knowing how it works.

I don't know if he does, just like you don't know if he does. He was never asked why he is against it while Obama is for it. This is the problem most conservative have. The media brushes over topics with Biden, while giving Palin pop quizzes.

As for the actual VP debate, let the canidates stand on thier own. I really don't care who asks the questions. It is the answers that have my attention.

[ConcordCowboy]

The Clintons' Coal-Gate
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT

As Bush wrapped up his Middle East trip, Sen. Clinton commented: "President Bush is over in the Gulf now begging the Saudis and others to drop the price of oil. How pathetic."

A large part of America's energy dependence on foreign sources can be traced to Sept. 18, 1996, when President Bill Clinton stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon on the Arizona side and signed an executive proclamation making 1.7 million acres of Utah a new national monument.

While sitting on the Arizona side of the Grand Canyon, Bill Clinton signed an order that federalized 1.7 million acres of Utah.

Why would he dedicate a Utah monument while standing in Arizona? Well, this federal land grab was done without any consultation with the governor of Utah or any member of the Utah congressional delegation or any elected official in the state. The unfriendly Utah natives might have spoiled his photo-op.

The state already had six national monuments, two national recreation areas and all or part of five national forests. Three-quarters of Utah already was in federal hands. Still, the land grab was sold as a move to protect the environment.

At the time, the Clintons were worried that Ralph Nader's presence on the ballot in a few Western states would draw green votes from Clinton in a race that promised to be close after the GOP retook Congress two years earlier.

In fact, the declaration of 1.7 million Utah acres as a national monument, thereby depriving an energy-starved U.S. up to 62 billion tons of environmentally safe low-sulfur coal worth $1.2 trillion and minable with minimal surface impact, was a political payoff to the family of James Riady.

He's the son of Lippo Group owner Mochtar Riady. James was found guilty of — and paid a multimillion dollar fine for — funneling more than $1 million in illegal political contributions through Lippo Bank into various American political campaigns, including Bill Clinton's presidential run in 1992.

Clinton took off the world market the largest known deposit of clean-burning coal. And who owned and controlled the second-largest deposit in the world of this clean coal? The Indonesian Lippo Group of James Riady. It is found and strip-mined on the Indonesian island of Kalimantan.

The Utah reserve contains a kind of low-sulfur, low-ash and therefore low-polluting coal that can be found in only a couple of places in the world. It burns so cleanly that it meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act without additional technology.

"The mother of all land grabs," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said at the time. He has called what was designated as the Grande Staircase of the Escalante National Monument the "Saudi Arabia of coal."

When Clinton signed the proclamation, he promised to exchange other federal lands for the land that was taken. But a fair exchange was impossible, Hatch said, since no other land in Utah had a trillion dollars worth of clean coal.

Rep. James Hansen, R-Utah, pointed out that a large portion of the coal-rich Kaiparowits Plateau within the monument belonged to the children of Utah. When Utah became a state in 1896, about 220,000 acres were set aside for development, and a trust fund was created to collect and hold all the revenues directly for the benefit of schools.

Margaret Bird, trust officer for the fund, said that because the land will not be developed, the schools stand to lose as much as $1 billion over the next 50 years. Phyllis Sorensen, head of the Utah chapter of the National Education Association, called Clinton's action a "felonious assault" and "stealing from the schoolchildren."

Stealing from children to reward Indonesian billionaires. How pathetic.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...285982232964929 (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=285982232964929)

What does that have to do with whether Biden knows how a Clean Coal Plant works or not?

[trickblue]

What does that have to do with whether Biden knows how a Clean Coal Plant works or not?

Maybe it was the cost.

I've read that while it's good to have Clean Coal...it's expensive.

I was referring to this part of your post...

Now you know why it's so expensive...

[Doomsday101]

What does that have to do with whether Biden knows how a Clean Coal Plant works or not?

What does it matter if he knows how they work? He is never going to work at a clean coal plant. He got up on stage and hollering about what their administration believed in and he was wrong he does not even know what his own ticket stands for.

[ConcordCowboy]

I don't know if he does, just like you don't know if he does. He was never asked why he is against it while Obama is for it. This is the problem most conservative have. The media brushes over topics with Biden, while giving Palin pop quizzes.

As for the actual VP debate, let the canidates stand on thier own. I really don't care who asks the questions. It is the answers that have my attention.

I never said I know if he knows or not and asked if anyone or you know.

So far all I got as proof of lack of knowledge and this is what I'm talking about was a post saying he was against it before being told no Obama's for it.

And that has nothing to do with knowledge of how a Clean coal Plant works...but rather being stupid in not getting straight what the ticket is for.

[ConcordCowboy]

I was referring to this part of your post...

Now you know why it's so expensive...

Sorry.

[ConcordCowboy]

What does it matter if he knows how they work? He is never going to work at a clean coal plant. He got up on stage and hollering about what their administration believed in and he was wrong he does not even know what his own ticket stands for.

Because I was talking about lack of knowledge on any given subject and you gave that example.

Not having your story straight as far as what the ticket wants or doesn't want does NOT mean you lack knowledge on the subject.

It means get your story straight before you say something and have to backtrack.

Lack of knowledge is the point.

[Doomsday101]

Because I was talking about lack of knowledge on any given subject and you gave that example.

Not having your story straight as far as what the ticket wants or doesn't want does NOT mean you lack knowledge on the subject.

It means get you story straight before you say something and have to backtrack.

Lack of knowledge is the point.

It shows he does not even know what he stands for, you can sit there and spin this and make excuses but if a man gets up on stage and does not even know what his own ticket stands for then that is flat out stupid. And is lack of knowledge is what his ticket believes in evidently he does not believe the same as Obama or he would not have made such comments to being with. Hell I don't care if he know how to build a coal plant that is not at issue he is telling voters, VOTE for us this is what we stand for and yet he does not know what he stands for? It is a joke

[jimnabby]

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy http://cowboyszone.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2302336#post2302336)
Maybe it was the cost.

I've read that while it's good to have Clean Coal...it's expensive.



I was referring to this part of your post...

Now you know why it's so expensive...

This is just silly. The cost of electricity (COE) from a coal plant is mostly determined by the high capital cost of the plant itself. The cost of coal is very low and a relatively small component of the COE. When you talk to coal power producers, you find out that they don't care about improving plant efficiency, precisely because coal is so cheap and it doesn't matter how much of it you end up using. All they care about is capital cost.

And the phrase "clean coal" has nothing to do with the composition of the starting coal. Low-sulfur coal is a nicer coal to use, certainly, but it is not "clean coal" by any stretch of the imagination. And the cost of working with higher-sulfur coals is small when compared to the overall cost of implementing clean coal technologies.

"Clean coal" refers to a set of technologies, notably IGCC, which produce power from coal while capturing (rather than releasing) the impurities in the starting coal. The issue with these plants is that the capital cost (NOT the coal cost) is still too high.

[ConcordCowboy]

It shows he does not even know what he stands for, you can sit there and spin this and make excuses but if a man gets up on stage and does not even know what his own ticket stands for then that is flat out stupid. And is lack of knowledge is what his ticket believes in evidently he does not believe the same as Obama or he would not have made such comments to being with. Hell I don't care if he know how to build a coal plant that is not at issue he is telling voters, VOTE for us this is what we stand for and yet he does not know what he stands for? It is a joke

Did you EVER see me say getting up on stage and saying what he said WASN'T stupid?

I was talking about for about the tenth time...:rolleyes: about lack of knowledge on a given subject...Like if Palin was asked about Clean Coal plants would she know how they work? Don't care for the answer that's not the point here.

The point is you gave a horrible example to the question and now you want to spin it yourself into...hey I don't care...if he said he was against it and then had to backtrack...that proves my point.

And it doesn't.

If you don't care fine...but don't act like he doesn't have knowledge on the subject..unless you can proof it.

Because AGAIN that's all I'm talking about.

[ConcordCowboy]

This is just silly. The cost of electricity (COE) from a coal plant is mostly determined by the high capital cost of the plant itself. The cost of coal is very low and a relatively small component of the COE. When you talk to coal power producers, you find out that they don't care about improving plant efficiency, precisely because coal is so cheap and it doesn't matter how much of it you end up using. All they care about is capital cost.

And the phrase "clean coal" has nothing to do with the composition of the starting coal. Low-sulfur coal is a nicer coal to use, certainly, but it is not "clean coal" by any stretch of the imagination. And the cost of working with higher-sulfur coals is small when compared to the overall cost of implementing clean coal technologies.

"Clean coal" refers to a set of technologies, notably IGCC, which produce power from coal while capturing (rather than releasing) the impurities in the starting coal. The issue with these plants is that the capital cost (NOT the coal cost) is still too high.

That's really what I was talking about...I saw/read that the plants were very expensive I can't remember if it was to build/convert whatever.

Not that cost of the coal itself was expensive.

[trickblue]

This is just silly. The cost of electricity (COE) from a coal plant is mostly determined by the high capital cost of the plant itself. The cost of coal is very low and a relatively small component of the COE. When you talk to coal power producers, you find out that they don't care about improving plant efficiency, precisely because coal is so cheap and it doesn't matter how much of it you end up using. All they care about is capital cost.

And the phrase "clean coal" has nothing to do with the composition of the starting coal. Low-sulfur coal is a nicer coal to use, certainly, but it is not "clean coal" by any stretch of the imagination. And the cost of working with higher-sulfur coals is small when compared to the overall cost of implementing clean coal technologies.

"Clean coal" refers to a set of technologies, notably IGCC, which produce power from coal while capturing (rather than releasing) the impurities in the starting coal. The issue with these plants is that the capital cost (NOT the coal cost) is still too high.

Interesting... then why did the Lippo groups coal plant tripled in value after Clinton declared Utah are off-limits.

I work in the electric utility business and fuel costs are the MAJOR factor in the COE...

Typically in the industry fuel costs are passed on to the consumer through what's known as PCRF (Power Cost Recovery Factor). All electric utility bills include a PCRF that reflects the rise and fall in the cost of generating wholesale power - more specifically, the changes in the cost of the fuel required to run the generation plant. Currently, the fuel driving these costs the most is natural gas. Coal is an issue now as environmental groups are pushing for cleaner burning coal. Since the largest supplier of Clean Burning Coal is no longer in this country, it drives up the costs of obtaining said coal to generation plants. We just had a major coal plant refused because of environmental impact...

[ConcordCowboy]

Interesting... then why did the Lippo groups coal plant tripled in value after Clinton declared Utah are off-limits.

I work in the electric utility business and fuel costs are the MAJOR factor in the COE...

Typically in the industry fuel costs are passed on to the consumer through what's known as PCRF (Power Cost Recovery Factor). All electric utility bills include a PCRF that reflects the rise and fall in the cost of generating wholesale power - more specifically, the changes in the cost of the fuel required to run the generation plant. Currently, the fuel driving these costs the most is natural gas. Coal is an issue now as environmental groups are pushing for cleaner burning coal. Since the largest supplier of Clean Burning Coal is no longer in this country, it drives up the costs of obtaining said coal to generation plants. We just had a major coal plant refused because of environmental impact...

Hey do you get free or reduced electricity, because you work for them?

[BrAinPaiNt]

Hey do you get free or reduced electricity, because you work for them?

He is a filthy lobbyist with republican ties and democratic lovers.

If you only knew the story of trickblue...first you would be ashamed of the filth, then you would be jealous of the tales of debauchery.

He is a pimp of the highest magnitude.

[trickblue]

Hey do you get free or reduced electricity, because you work for them?

Man I wish... you'd be surprised how many people ask that question. In fact, we get discounts on NOTHING... not even internet access...

[ConcordCowboy]

Man I wish... you'd be surprised how many people ask that question. In fact, we get discounts on NOTHING... not even internet access...

Damn Utilities!

:p:

[bbgun]

First Question to You, Senator Biden

Do you love Barack as much as I do?


I have a Masters in journalism, and if I remember certain courses correctly, this flunks every ethics test under the sun, from conflict of interest issues to appearances of impropriety. You think the NFL would let the Cowboys cheerleaders referee a Cowboys playoff game? How out of control and out of touch is the MSM that they didn't think this would be a big deal? The fact that the McCain camp is "above it all" or "cool with it" is wholly irrelevant, because it never should have gotten this far. And shame on Ifill and the networks for putting the McCain camp in such an uncomfortable position. If she arrogantly insists on moderating this debate, she must make a public disclaimer at the start of the broadcast which discloses her pro-Obama book project and the fact the she stands to benefit financially if Obama wins. The book’s set for release on January 20th, inauguration day. She’ll obviously lose money in the event of a McCain win. If she fails to do so, she would forfeit the little credibility she has left. For what it's worth, Greta Van Susteren just said that the McCain campaign didn’t know and wasn’t informed about Ifill’s book and that in law, this would cause a mistrial. But hey, I guess it’s perfectly okay for supposedly impartial “moderators” to be biased and have jawdropping conflicts of interests - as long as it’s a left bias.

[jimnabby]

I work in the electric utility business and fuel costs are the MAJOR factor in the COE...

Typically in the industry fuel costs are passed on to the consumer through what's known as PCRF (Power Cost Recovery Factor). All electric utility bills include a PCRF that reflects the rise and fall in the cost of generating wholesale power - more specifically, the changes in the cost of the fuel required to run the generation plant. Currently, the fuel driving these costs the most is natural gas. Coal is an issue now as environmental groups are pushing for cleaner burning coal. Since the largest supplier of Clean Burning Coal is no longer in this country, it drives up the costs of obtaining said coal to generation plants. We just had a major coal plant refused because of environmental impact...

For natural gas plants, the fuel cost is by far the largest component of COE - it accounts for 2/3 of COE or so, depending on the current price. For pulverized coal plants (particularly supercritical) and IGCC, it's in the 20% range. Yes, the use of dirtier coals can affect this, but again, the effect is tiny compared to the capital cost contribution.

[trickblue]

For natural gas plants, the fuel cost is by far the largest component of COE - it accounts for 2/3 of COE or so, depending on the current price. For pulverized coal plants (particularly supercritical) and IGCC, it's in the 20% range. Yes, the use of dirtier coals can affect this, but again, the effect is tiny compared to the capital cost contribution.

But the capital cost contribution is spread out over time and usually is accompanied by tax subsidies and land breaks. Yes they are expensive to build/operate, I won't argue that point in the least, but IOU's would not be in the business if they weren't making good money... even though it is a regulated industry...

The reason that coal-fired plants are now being proposed is the fact that natural gas IS so expensive. To break it down in an easy to understand for those that aren't familiar, it's around $3.00 per gallon. With coal-fired plants being introduced the environmental groups are coming back forcing IGCC plants to be the rule and I have no problem whatsoever with this as I am an environmentalist. It still doesn't change the fact that since we can't get the low-sulfur coal from our largest reserves then the price is higher to operate coal-fired plants.

With the Clinton issued executive order creating the 1.7 million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah, Lippo is world's ONLY low-sulfur coal mine.

That was my whole point. If we could have tapped into the Utah reserves it would be even cheaper to generate power via coal-fired plants.

[bbgun]

From the blogosphere

A partial list of Gwen Ifill's questions for the VP debate

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Senator Biden, what is your favorite color? And if you have time for a follow-up question: Why?

Mayor, you talk funny and you own a tanning bed. Why haven't you released Trig's birth certificate?

Senator, have you seen those pictures of Obama in his swim trunks? If not, I have them right here.

Mayor, what are the names, ages, and blood types of all 71 members of the Belgian Senate? And why are you unwilling to admit that your inability to instantly produce any and every fact I demand makes you unfit to stand in the way of history?

Senator, you've spoken at length. Could you please continue?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

Senator, could you please sign my book?

[Sasquatch]

Ifill responds:

"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job."

...

Although Malkin raised the topic of Ifill's impartiality the day before the debate, the PBS journalist said that Time magazine noted she was writing a book in August, and that it has been available for pre-sale on Amazon.com. The book also is mentioned in a Sept. 4 interview she gave the Washington Post.

Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.

"Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?" said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, "I don't know what it is. I find it curious."

Full article at
YahooNews (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/ap_on_en_ot/debate_ifill;_ylt=AjYHfp.eMTrT7OW6xtNu5iWs0NUE)

[jimnabby]

But the capital cost contribution is spread out over time and usually is accompanied by tax subsidies and land breaks. Yes they are expensive to build/operate, I won't argue that point in the least, but IOU's would not be in the business if they weren't making good money... even though it is a regulated industry...

The reason that coal-fired plants are now being proposed is the fact that natural gas IS so expensive. To break it down in an easy to understand for those that aren't familiar, it's around $3.00 per gallon. With coal-fired plants being introduced the environmental groups are coming back forcing IGCC plants to be the rule and I have no problem whatsoever with this as I am an environmentalist. It still doesn't change the fact that since we can't get the low-sulfur coal from our largest reserves then the price is higher to operate coal-fired plants.

With the Clinton issued executive order creating the 1.7 million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah, Lippo is world's ONLY low-sulfur coal mine.

That was my whole point. If we could have tapped into the Utah reserves it would be even cheaper to generate power via coal-fired plants.

That's fine. The numbers I gave included the amortization. Anyway, we're in agreement; my point is simply that the high first cost of IGCC plants is a bigger barrier for clean coal than the lack of access to low-sulfur coal.

[trickblue]

That's fine. The numbers I gave included the amortization. Anyway, we're in agreement; my point is simply that the high first cost of IGCC plants is a bigger barrier for clean coal than the lack of access to low-sulfur coal.

And we were taking different approaches...

You obviously have a background in the industry as I do... and you know your stuff... but the fact remains that Lippo has the only clean coal plant in the world. Had it not been for Clinton, we would have the largest and the only other one...

If we had access to those clean coal deposits, electricity would be cheaper to the provider and then as such subsequently cheaper to the consumer...

I actually don't work for an IOU but rather a cooperative. Our profits are sweet until you reach 15% and then the rest goes into escheetment funds to be paid later to our investors/members/consumers...

In other words it goes back the people...

It's a great industry and honest as they day is long. After over 13 years I am leaving it to become a consultant next month...

Selleout? yep... I'm a capitalist bastid... :laugh2:

[trickblue]

Ifill responds:

"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job."

...

Although Malkin raised the topic of Ifill's impartiality the day before the debate, the PBS journalist said that Time magazine noted she was writing a book in August, and that it has been available for pre-sale on Amazon.com. The book also is mentioned in a Sept. 4 interview she gave the Washington Post.

Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.

"Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?" said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, "I don't know what it is. I find it curious."

Full article at
YahooNews (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/ap_on_en_ot/debate_ifill;_ylt=AjYHfp.eMTrT7OW6xtNu5iWs0NUE)

Link Excerpt: (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081002/D93I484G3.html) Ifill said Obama's story, which she has yet to write, is only a small part of the book, which discusses how politics in the black community have changed since the civil rights era. Among those subjects is Colin Powell, secretary of state in the Bush administration.

The host of PBS'"Washington Week" and senior correspondent on "The NewsHour" said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book. The commission had no immediate comment when contacted by The Associated Press. A spokeswoman for John McCain's campaign did not immediately return phone and e-mail messages.


Link: (http://www.essence.com/news_entertainment/news/articles/theobamasportraitofanamericanfamily)The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family
Gwen Ifill

Soon we will vote for our next president, and for the first time in history, one of the two candidates is a Black man. For a year, Essence pursued an interview with the entire Obama family‹to no avail. Finally, this summer ESSENCE became the only Black media outlet allowed a glimpse into the lives of Barack, Michelle and their two girls, Malia and Sasha, when we were invited to their South Side Chicago home. Weeks later, veteran political journalist Gwen Ifill was with the family as they campaigned in a small mostly White western town, and she flew with them to a Black church in the urban Midwest.

Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator's arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn't get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing.

I've just asked them how their lives have changed since he won the Democratic presidential nomination. There have definitely been changes, especially for Michelle Obama, who used to pride herself on campaigning by day and rushing home to her daughters each night. Now she is spending more of her days and nights on the road, but seldom in the same place as her husband. And when their daughters‹Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7 get to see their dad, they likely have to share him with thousands of adoring strangers. "Daddy's gone a lot," Sasha notes. "We don't see him that much."

But on this Fourth of July, everyone is together. Even though there are at least a half-dozen aides and family members on the bus with us, it feels intimate back here. Michelle and Barack are curled up on the beige couch, while the children are reading and coloring a few feet away. Michelle folds her long legs to her chin and leans into her husband as he explains the reality of their lives. When he pauses, she finishes his sentences.

Their ease with each other recalls the day several weeks earlier when ESSENCE arrived to photograph the Obamas at their large Georgian Revivial home on Chicago's South Side. Barack stood on the lawn playfully teasing his wife as she posed for our cameras. Now, as then, his customary public caution melts away when he is with his family. Under relentless media scrutiny, Barack Obama says his family is going the extra mile to "maintain this little island of normalcy in the midst of all this swirl of activity."

But family snapshots of this sort are rare, as are moments when the Obamas can just chill. "Michelle has done a heroic job of managing the house, the family and still finding time to campaign and be out on the road," he says, after directing staff members to turn off the television, which was tuned to Fox News Channel. "I'm always marveling at everything that she can do."

And then he sings.

"I'm every woman," he croons. She cringes. He laughs. "That's Michelle. It's like, Chaka Khan! Chaka Khan!"

[zrinkill]

A partial list of Gwen Ifill's questions for the VP debate

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Senator Biden, what is your favorite color? And if you have time for a follow-up question: Why?

Mayor, you talk funny and you own a tanning bed. Why haven't you released Trig's birth certificate?

Senator, have you seen those pictures of Obama in his swim trunks? If not, I have them right here.

Mayor, what are the names, ages, and blood types of all 71 members of the Belgian Senate? And why are you unwilling to admit that your inability to instantly produce any and every fact I demand makes you unfit to stand in the way of history?

Senator, you've spoken at length. Could you please continue?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

Senator, could you please sign my book?

:lmao:

You owe me a new keyboard.

[trickblue]

From the blogosphere

A partial list of Gwen Ifill's questions for the VP debate

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Senator Biden, what is your favorite color? And if you have time for a follow-up question: Why?

Mayor, you talk funny and you own a tanning bed. Why haven't you released Trig's birth certificate?

Senator, have you seen those pictures of Obama in his swim trunks? If not, I have them right here.

Mayor, what are the names, ages, and blood types of all 71 members of the Belgian Senate? And why are you unwilling to admit that your inability to instantly produce any and every fact I demand makes you unfit to stand in the way of history?

Senator, you've spoken at length. Could you please continue?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

Senator, could you please sign my book?

No matter on which side you fall politically, that right there is comedy gold...

[BrAinPaiNt]

From the blogosphere

A partial list of Gwen Ifill's questions for the VP debate

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Senator Biden, what is your favorite color? And if you have time for a follow-up question: Why?

Mayor, you talk funny and you own a tanning bed. Why haven't you released Trig's birth certificate?

Senator, have you seen those pictures of Obama in his swim trunks? If not, I have them right here.

Mayor, what are the names, ages, and blood types of all 71 members of the Belgian Senate? And why are you unwilling to admit that your inability to instantly produce any and every fact I demand makes you unfit to stand in the way of history?

Senator, you've spoken at length. Could you please continue?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

Senator, could you please sign my book?

:laugh2: The Belgian senate one was gold.

On a side note.

I can not provide a link to it, as it has a couple of adult words in it.

However if you can find the comedic slide show of Biden practicing his debate with Palin...it is worth it.